During the 1970s, I saw an analogy in philosophy with E.F. Schumacher's distinction between intermediate and high technology (in Small Is Beautiful: Economics As If People Mattered). Schumacher argued that the high technology of advanced, industrialized nations was inappropriate for the third world and that a less sophisticated, intermediate technology was better suited to the needs of large numbers of people in these developing countries. Similarly, I decided that high philosophy (that is, the scholarly books and the articles in research journals that provide the core of graduate school training and garner prestige within the profession) were inappropriate for the great mass of students in undergraduate courses. There should be an intermediate philosophy--less technical, more jargon-free, and more practical--directed toward students who have little to gain from high philosophy, either because of its difficulty or its irrelevance. There should be standards of excellence for intermediate philosophy, different from but, as important as those for high philosophy. So I decided to produce philosophical writings--even about my more creative philosophical insights--in a way that can be grasped by typical undergraduate students. This has led to textbook writing as a major professional occupation.
Complementary with this commitment to intermediate philosophy are several other notions that guide my philosophical work.
(1) In terms of influence, I view teaching as more important than published research for the overwhelming majority of college professors. Most published research appeals to highly specialized interests of a small group of scholars, is seldom cited in other sources, and seldom has any lasting significance. We need research for its contribution to better teaching; and we do not always know ahead of time when a particular area of research will have lasting significance. Yet we cannot escape the recognition that we are more likely to have an impact through teaching rather than through research.
(2) By temperament, I am strongly inclined to use my resources reading a major philosopher's works rather than reading commentators commenting on commentaries on a major philosopher's works. Too often, in my judgment, commentary in journals produces misunderstandings and misinterpretations that can be avoided by concentrating instead on the major thinker's works.
(3) Given a choice, I prefer to concentrate on basic issues that always retain philosophical interest rather than devote study to specialized problems that are unlikely to be very interesting a hundred years from now. I also prefer contributions to a comprehensive solution to philosophical problems over a piecemeal approach that produces isolated papers--because the comprehensive system is more likely to hold philosophical interest in the future.
Lest any of my comments seem to exhibit any unjustified arrogance, I hasten to assert that I do reflect upon my own limitations. On the other hand, I do not apologize for advocating a position when I am willing to provide supporting reasons.
My biggest current project is an attempt to work out my own position with respect to a wide range of basic philosophical issues before I retire from teaching.So far, the project has produced four textbooks that I use in my classes--Practical Logic (1992), Practical Ethics (1993), Philosophical Problems: God, Free Will, and Determininism (1993), and Philosophical Problems: The Good Life (1994). I envision two more textbooks to complete the project: Philosophical Problems: Human Nature, Individuals, and Society and Philosophical Problems: Knowledge, Matter, and Mind.
Another major project is the development of computer programs that deal with problems in ethics and social philosophy. I think that computers offer an excellent opportunity to develop interactive dialogues on philosophical issues. In 1991, I completed a prototype program, Banning Boxing? (by no means "state of the art") that students in my ethics class may use as an outside project. (Students give me mixed reports on the program--some finding it interesting and challenging while others find it too constricting and confrontational.) In addition to improving the programming, I plan to develop several other programs dealing with issues such as abortion, pornography, welfare, and affluence.
Finally, I have been developing for some time text material that presents the logic of scientific method by applying it to the borderline area of occult phenomena. I have rough drafts of two volumes, the first concentrating on standards of scientific explanation and the second (so far) dealing with creationism and astrology.
Messages or Comments? yezzi@mankato.msus.edu
(Note: For years I've maintained a policy of not listening to anonymous telephone callers and of not reading anonymous letters addressed to me. Before reading an e-mail message offering comments, I first satisfy myself that I know the identity of the sender and I then test to make sure that I can send a reply. So if you want me to do more than admire the ingenuity of your e-mail name, be sure to identify yourself and to make a dialogue possible.)
Last updated 12/3/95